1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was established around May 12, 2009 for the purpose of managing and operating the shopping mall of the 7th underground floor in Jung-gu Seoul and the 16th apartment building of the ground (hereinafter “D”).

The Plaintiff filed an application for the registration of the establishment of the shopping mall in this case pursuant to the Distribution Industry Development Act and received the registration certificate of the superstore from the head of the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 22, 201, and on September 4, 2013, the head of the Gu accepted the Plaintiff’s report from the operator of the superstore, thereby dealing with the duties such as imposing and collecting management fees and claiming management fees for the unpaid operator of the shopping mall in this case as the qualifications of the operator

B. The defendant is a sectional owner of E-ho store on the seventh floor of the shopping mall building of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the store of this case").

C. The Defendant did not pay 2,111,150 won in aggregate of the management expenses and late payment fees regarding the instant store, which falls within the period from January 2014 to May 2016 (i.e., unpaid management expenses + 372,760 won in arrears).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, a superstore manager of the shopping mall of the shopping mall of this case, the total sum of unpaid management expenses and late payment fees 2,111,150 won, and the unpaid management expenses 1,738,390 won among them, to the Plaintiff, who is the manager of the shopping mall of this case, for delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from January 26, 2017 to the date of full payment.

3. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s assertion is illegally closed from February 5, 2010 to February 5, 2010 by means of blocking entry, such as cutting off, cutting off, elevator, and operation suspension of escalators, etc. with respect to the portion of the fourth, sixth, and seven stories of the shopping mall of this case.